New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support multiple frameworks in `archive` command #1005

Merged
merged 11 commits into from Jan 18, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@ikesyo
Member

ikesyo commented Dec 18, 2015

This would be useful for some libraries, for example, which have a Objective-C framework and the corresponding Swift one (e.g. https://github.com/CocoaLumberjack/CocoaLumberjack).

carthage archive CocoaLumberjack CocoaLumberjackSwift
@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Dec 18, 2015

Member

Or should we remove this line and recommend to attach multiple .framework.zip files to their GitHub releases as CocoaLumberjack currently does?

Member

ikesyo commented Dec 18, 2015

Or should we remove this line and recommend to attach multiple .framework.zip files to their GitHub releases as CocoaLumberjack currently does?

@NachoSoto

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@NachoSoto

NachoSoto Dec 18, 2015

Contributor

Yeah, I think I'd rather keep this simple and encourage running carthage archive separately for each framework.

Contributor

NachoSoto commented Dec 18, 2015

Yeah, I think I'd rather keep this simple and encourage running carthage archive separately for each framework.

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Dec 18, 2015

Member

I would be 👍 with this, post #892 especially. It makes sense for the .zip to contain whatever would get built if you weren't using binaries.

After #892, maybe we could make the arguments to archive optional—defaulting to archiving all the frameworks from the current project.

Member

mdiep commented Dec 18, 2015

I would be 👍 with this, post #892 especially. It makes sense for the .zip to contain whatever would get built if you weren't using binaries.

After #892, maybe we could make the arguments to archive optional—defaulting to archiving all the frameworks from the current project.

@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Dec 22, 2015

Member

defaulting to archiving all the frameworks from the current project

Does this mean the frameworks built by --no-skip-current or all the frameworks in Carthage/Build?

Member

ikesyo commented Dec 22, 2015

defaulting to archiving all the frameworks from the current project

Does this mean the frameworks built by --no-skip-current or all the frameworks in Carthage/Build?

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Dec 22, 2015

Member

All the frameworks in the current project (--no-skip-current), excluding dependencies.

Member

mdiep commented Dec 22, 2015

All the frameworks in the current project (--no-skip-current), excluding dependencies.

@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Dec 23, 2015

Member

I got it, thanks!

Member

ikesyo commented Dec 23, 2015

I got it, thanks!

ikesyo added some commits Dec 18, 2015

Support multiple frameworks in `archive` command
This would be useful for some libraries, for example, which have a Objective-C framework and the corresponding Swift one (e.g. https://github.com/CocoaLumberjack/CocoaLumberjack).
@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Jan 14, 2016

Member

@mdiep I've rebased and implemented #1005 (comment).

Member

ikesyo commented Jan 14, 2016

@mdiep I've rebased and implemented #1005 (comment).

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Jan 14, 2016

Member

I hope to catch up on Carthage PRs over the next few days.

Member

mdiep commented Jan 14, 2016

I hope to catch up on Carthage PRs over the next few days.

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Jan 15, 2016

Member

This looks mostly correct, but I left a found a couple things that should be fixed and I think we ought to clean up the implementation a little.

Thanks for doing this! It'll be a nice touch.

Member

mdiep commented Jan 15, 2016

This looks mostly correct, but I left a found a couple things that should be fixed and I think we ought to clean up the implementation a little.

Thanks for doing this! It'll be a nice touch.

@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Jan 16, 2016

Member

@mdiep Thank you for the review, I've addressed them! ⚡️ (diff with white space ignored)

Could you please re-review? 🙏

Member

ikesyo commented Jan 16, 2016

@mdiep Thank you for the review, I've addressed them! ⚡️ (diff with white space ignored)

Could you please re-review? 🙏

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Jan 17, 2016

Member

Looks good apart from the function names. 👍

Member

mdiep commented Jan 17, 2016

Looks good apart from the function names. 👍

@ikesyo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ikesyo

ikesyo Jan 18, 2016

Member

Thanks for the feedbacks.

Member

ikesyo commented Jan 18, 2016

Thanks for the feedbacks.

@mdiep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mdiep

mdiep Jan 18, 2016

Member

Member

mdiep commented Jan 18, 2016

mdiep added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2016

Merge pull request #1005 from Carthage/archive-multiple-frameworks
Support multiple frameworks in `archive` command

@mdiep mdiep merged commit 1249802 into master Jan 18, 2016

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details

@mdiep mdiep deleted the archive-multiple-frameworks branch Jan 18, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment